Date: 1904-02

L. E. GALPERIN ON BEHALF OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE — TO V. I. LENIN AND F. V. LENGNIK*.

[29] 16. 2. 04. [Moscow 1.]

Dear Comrades!

Regarding your three proposals 2, the following decisions were made:

1) By a vote of 5 against 1, the proposal for an immediate congress 3 was rejected on account of: a) its inexpediency, since given the present balance of forces it would not only fail to eliminate the discord but would on the contrary formalize the split, creating two independent parties with independent Central Bureaus, Central Committees, and committees operating in parallel in all industrial centers; b) on account of the moment (the war), which demands the application of all energy and does not permit the diversion of the best forces for its preparation and conduct; c) on account of the extreme scarcity of means amid enormous current and anticipated expenses; d) on account of the extreme disadvantage of this for the Central Committee, which has not yet succeeded in demonstrating sufficiently impressive activity — not so much as a consequence of internal strife as on account of internal disorder and lack of solidarity in positive work and in the struggle against sedition 4.

2) Unanimously, by a vote of 6, the proposal to co-opt I[gnati] and L[e]p[eshinskii] was rejected. It was deemed unnecessary, at least for now, to replenish the membership; besides, one is too well known to everyone, and the other is not known at all; and it was resolved not to accept new members without preliminary acquaintance.

3) Unanimously, we joined your proposal to select an executive group.

By a vote of 5, the following were proposed and temporarily selected (pending receipt of your votes): Nikitich, Nil, and Alfa; in place of Nikitich, the opposition proposed Kol 6.

We harbor the hope that we shall soon be able to win sympathies and establish our influence, after which it will not be difficult to resolve the question of one or another form of consolidating this influence. We await with impatience all those who were invited 7.

We all beseech the old man to drop the squabbling and get to work. We await leaflets and brochures and all manner of advice — the best way to restore one's nerves and the best answer to abuse.

As soon as we are finally settled, we shall enter into the liveliest correspondence.

Leaflets have been printed and are already being distributed: 1) to society, 2) on the war. More will follow soon.

Some 100 poods of literature awaits distribution in the near future. We shake your hand firmly.

Masha*.

1 The residence of the Central Committee (the central bureau of the C.C.) at that time was in Moscow. L. E. Galperin was at that moment located there (see above the letter of N. K. Krupskaya to L. M. Knipovich, document 188, p. 347).

2 From these words it is evident that the present letter was the official response of the Central Committee to a letter from foreign members of the C.C., containing the three proposals indicated here and sent to Russia, apparently sometime in February. This letter of the foreign section of the C.C. with the "three proposals" is not currently available to the Lenin Institute.

3 By this vote, documentary evidence is established of the balance of forces within the Central Committee on the question of convening a congress. The majority (5 members) of the C.C., finally, officially expressed itself against the congress in collective discussion of the question. From the correspondence of the foreign section of the C.C. with individual Russian members of the C.C. cited above, it is clear who exactly comprised this majority. These were: V. A. Noskov, L. B. Krasin, L. E. Galperin, G. M. Krzhizhanovsky, F. V. Gusarov. The minority (4 members) of the C.C., which advocated for the congress, consisted of V. I. Lenin, F. V. Lengnik, M. M. Essen (abroad) and R. S. Zemlychka (in Russia). This vote was a very important symptom of the impending crisis within the C.C.

4 Here, indirectly but at the same time very clearly, an accusation is voiced against the foreign section of the C.C. and first and foremost against Lenin for "lack of solidarity in positive work and in the struggle against sedition [against the opposition]." By this the Russian majority of the C.C. (the five) definitively established its complete lack of solidarity in internal party policy with Lenin's line.

5 The discussion concerns, apparently, the selection of an "executive group" or executive commission of the C.C.

6 The candidacy of F. V. Lengnik figures here either as a possible alternative candidate alongside L. B. Krasin for membership in the "executive group" (in case of a vote by foreign members), or as a candidate in case of the withdrawal of a selected member.

7 The reference is to practical workers who were then abroad. It is quite probable that among those summoned by the C.C. to Russia was F. V. Lengnik himself, who indeed departed there in March. There is no precise information as to exactly whom the C.C. summoned.